RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The promotional activities by medical representatives (MRs) of the pharmaceutical companies can impact the prescribing pattern of doctors. Hence, the interaction between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry is coming under increasing scrutiny. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to assess the attitude of the doctors toward the interaction with the MRs of the pharmaceutical company. The secondary objective was to assess the awareness of the doctors about regulations governing their interaction with the pharmaceutical company. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. This study was carried out using a pretested questionnaire containing 10 questions between June and September 2014. The doctors working in the Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital, Perambalur (Tamil Nadu) during the study period was included. RESULTS: A total of 100 pretested questionnaires were distributed, and 81 doctors responded (response rate 81%). 37% doctors responded that they interacted with MR once a week whereas 25.9% told that they interact with MRs twice a month. About 69.1% doctors think that MR exaggerate the benefits of medicines and downplays the risks and contraindications of medicine(P = 0.000). 61.7% doctors think that MR has an impact on their prescribing (P = 0.000). 63% doctors stated that they had received promotional tools such as stationery items, drug sample, textbooks or journal reprints from MR in last 12 months (P = 0.0012). Unfortunately, 70.4% doctors have not read the guidelines about interacting with the pharmaceutical industry or its representative (P = 0.000). CONCLUSION: Rather than forbidding any connection between doctors and industry, it is better to establish ethical guidelines. The Medical Council of India code is a step in the right direction, but the majority of doctors in this study have not read the guidelines about interacting with the pharmaceutical industry or its representative.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) of the healthcare professionals about pharmacovigilance in Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Medical College and Hospital (DSMCH), Perambalur (Tamil Nadu), a tertiary care teaching hospital. The second primary objective was to assess the causation of underreporting of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) as it needs to be well-assessed in India. The secondary objective was to compare the findings of this study with the results of the published studies from India on evaluation of the KAP of pharmacovigilance among healthcare professional. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out using a pretested questionnaire. The questionnaire was designed to assess the KAP regarding pharmacovigilance. The healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses, and pharmacists) working in the DSMCH, Perambalur (Tamil Nadu) during the study period were included. Only those who gave their consent to participate were included in the study. The data was analyzed by using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) statistical software, version 16. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty pretested questionnaires were distributed among the healthcare professionals and 101 responded. 62.4% healthcare workers gave correct response regarding the definition of pharmacovigilance. 75.2% of healthcare workers were aware regarding the existence of a National Pharmacovigilance Program of India. 69.3% healthcare professional agreed that ADR reporting is a professional obligation for them. Among the participants, 64.4% have experienced ADRs in patients, but only 22.8% have ever reported ADR to pharmacovigilance center. Unfortunately only 53.5% healthcare workers have been trained for reporting adverse reactions. But, 97% healthcare professionals agreed that reporting of ADR is necessary and 92.1% were of the view that pharmacovigilance should be taught in detail to healthcare professional. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that knowledge and attitude towards pharmacovigilance is gradually improving among healthcare professionals, but unfortunately the actual practice of ADR reporting is still deficient among them.
RESUMO
The position of regional medical advisor (RMA) is relatively new in the pharmaceutical industry and its roles and responsibility are still evolving. The RMA is a field based position whose main mission is to foster collaborative relationships with the key opinion leaders (KOLs) and to facilitate the exchange of unbiased scientific information between the medical community and the company. Field-based medical liaison teams are expanding world-wide as part of the pharmaceutical industry's increased focus on global operations including emerging markets. Now, the position of the RMA has evolved into comprehensive, complex, highly interactive, targeted, highly strategic, innovative, and independent role since its inception by the Upjohn Company in 1967. The major objective of the RMA is to develop the professional relationships with the health-care community, particularly KOLs, through peer-to-peer contact. The RMA can facilitate investigator-initiated clinical research proposals from approval until completion, presentation, and publication. It is possible for a RMA to have valuable access to KOLs through his expertise in the clinical research. The RMA can assist in the development, review, and follow-up of the clinical studies initiated within the relevant therapeutic area at the regional/local level. The RMA can lead regional/local clinical projects to ensure that all clinical trials are conducted in compliance with the International Conference of Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH GCP) guidelines.
